This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/10/shark-cull-this-half-baked-u-turn-is-not-convincing

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Shark cull: this half-baked U-turn is not convincing Shark cull: this half-baked U-turn is not convincing
(6 months later)
With a WA Senate by-election date set for 5 With a WA Senate by-election date set for 5 April, we are seeing strategic thinkers amongst the federal political right attempting to claw back public credibility after the Abbott government’s first six months in office.
April, we are seeing strategic thinkers amongst the federal political right attempting Last Thursday, Andrew Laming, the Liberal-National member for Bowman in Queensland, came out swinging against shark culling, both as a practice conducted in his own electorate and in WA. He urged that in relation to the shark hazard “actions need to be based on evidence,” adding that as an ocean swimmer who has been watching shark culling in his electorate for a very long time, he has personally felt “deeply uncomfortable with it”. Anti-shark cull sentiment in his electorate was very strong, he added during his ABC interview.
to claw back public credibility after the Abbott government’s first six months in office. I am sure Laming is genuine in his comments, but I believe there is something disingenuous about the timing. Why did he keep quiet three months ago, when this policy was first announced? Is it not just the fact that the Liberals have been blindsided by the overwhelming public opposition to shark culling in every state, and that a national-based poll on the issue has seen them turning to damage-control, especially now a key Senate by-election has been called?
Last Thursday, Andrew Laming, Federal environment minister Greg Hunt also appeared to be seeking political kudos this week by announcing that for the Barnett shark cull to continue beyond 30 April, it would have to pass muster in a full assessment under federal environmental legislation. This only goes to confirm what the Greens and other cull opponents, including highly qualified shark scientists, have said from day one: that the exemption granted by Hunt in early January was based on dubious grounds and fails the science test.
the Liberal-National member for Bowman in Queensland, came out swinging against While Laming and Hunt may be looking for a way to back-pedal out of trouble with the electorate over sharks, the prime minister and WA premier are not making their job any easier.
shark culling, both as a practice conducted in his own electorate and in WA. He Colin Barnett was still recently citing personal theories in the media about the behaviour and whereabouts of large sharks as the basis for the future of his drum lining strategy, while still failing to ground any of his theories in scientific evidence. Abbott was backing him up, stating “it’s a state issue but what Colin’s doing has been done successfully off the coast of Queensland for decades.”
urged that in relation to the shark hazard “actions need to be based on Not exactly “successfully”, however. Queensland averages 500-600 dead sharks a year from netting and drum lining, 50% of which are less than two metres long, only 1% of which are great white sharks (the only shark that is a danger to humans in WA waters based on the evidence) and a large number of which are listed as vulnerable or endangered including the grey nurse, dusky whaler, scalloped hammerhead, speartooth and zebra shark. None of these sharks are considered dangerous, just endangered.
evidence,” adding that as an ocean swimmer who has been watching shark The fact that it may be politically difficult due to public fear to remove a shark nets and drum lines shark control program that was introduced in the 1960s does not make that policy a success. It just makes it an out-dated policy that hasn’t been replaced. I note that whereas other countries such as Hawaii have stopped shark culls, WA is the only jurisdiction in the world that has introduced one in the current century. Barnett’s shark cull policy, introduced with the complicity of the federal liberal government, is a strategy that literally hales from half a century ago, not one based on the state of knowledge and awareness in 2014.
culling in his electorate for a very long time, he has personally felt “deeply Hawaii culled more than 4,500 sharks between 1959 and 1976 and has said no to culling ever since, even following a spate of fatal attacks in the early 1990s. According to the chairman of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, culling was briefly considered in 1992 and then dismissed on environmental and cultural grounds. “We opted instead to put our efforts into research, which showed that … culling would have devastating ecological consequences,” he told a Perth newspaper last month, adding:
uncomfortable with it”. Anti-shark cull In Hawaii, we recognise that we are a state which depends on the surrounding ocean for our sustenance, economic benefits, recreational opportunities and cultural lifestyle. We also recognise and respect the importance of scientific research to help us understand, manage and protect our vital ocean resource. The millions of people who live here or visit need to recognise that the ocean is a natural environment where there are predators.
sentiment in his electorate was very strong, he added during his ABC interview. The Greens believe the same is true in Western Australia.
I am sure Laming is genuine in his
comments, but I believe there is something disingenuous about the timing. Why
did he keep quiet three months ago, when this policy was first announced? Is it
not just the fact that the Liberals have been blindsided by the overwhelming
public opposition to shark culling in every state, and that a national-based poll on
the issue has seen them turning to damage-control, especially now a key
Senate by-election has been called?
Federal environment minister Greg Hunt also
appeared to be seeking political kudos this week by announcing that for the
Barnett shark cull to continue beyond 30 April, it would have to pass muster in
a full assessment under federal environmental legislation. This only goes to
confirm what the Greens and other cull opponents, including highly qualified
shark scientists, have said from day one: that the exemption granted by Hunt in early January was based on dubious
grounds and fails the science test.
While Laming and Hunt
may be looking for a way to back-pedal out of trouble with the electorate over
sharks, the prime minister and WA premier are not making their job any easier.
Colin Barnett was still recently citing personal theories in the media about the behaviour and whereabouts of
large sharks as the basis for the future of his drum lining strategy, while
still failing to ground any of his theories in scientific evidence. Abbott
was backing him up, stating “it’s a state issue but what Colin’s doing has
been done successfully off the coast of Queensland for decades.”
Not exactly “successfully”, however.
Queensland averages 500-600 dead sharks a year from netting and drum lining, 50% of which are less than two metres long, only 1% of which are
great white sharks (the only shark that is a danger to humans in WA waters
based on the evidence) and a large number of which are listed as vulnerable or
endangered including the grey nurse, dusky whaler, scalloped hammerhead,
speartooth and zebra shark. None of these sharks are considered dangerous, just
endangered.
The fact that it may be politically
difficult due to public fear to remove a shark nets and drum lines shark
control program that was introduced in the 1960s does not make that policy a
success. It just makes it an out-dated policy that hasn’t been replaced. I note
that whereas other countries such as Hawaii have stopped shark culls, WA is the
only jurisdiction in the world that has introduced one in the current century. Barnett’s shark cull policy, introduced with the complicity of the federal
liberal government, is a strategy that literally hales from half a century ago,
not one based on the state of knowledge and awareness in 2014.
Hawaii culled more
than 4,500 sharks between 1959 and 1976 and has said no to culling ever since,
even following a spate of fatal attacks in the early 1990s. According to the
chairman of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, culling was
briefly considered in 1992 and then dismissed on environmental and cultural
grounds. “We opted instead to put our efforts into research, which showed that
… culling would have devastating ecological consequences,” he told a Perth
newspaper last month, adding:
In Hawaii, we recognise that we are a state which depends on the
surrounding ocean for our sustenance, economic benefits, recreational opportunities
and cultural lifestyle. We also
recognise and respect the importance of scientific research to help us
understand, manage and protect our vital ocean resource. The millions
of people who live here or visit need to recognise that the ocean is a natural
environment where there are predators.
The Greens believe
the same is true in Western Australia.